Utolsó frissítés: 2026.06.03. — Szerző: Anti-Propaganda News Blog
Original article: HERE
An analysis of Neokohn's article in the hasbara (pro-Israel communication and advocacy), as well as from the perspective of media and narrative analysis. The text precisely employs framing, legal, and rhetorical techniques aimed at politically delegitimizing proceedings before international courts and shaping domestic and international public opinion.
Here is a detailed analysis of the article based on the key hasbara mechanisms:
1. Legal asymmetry and the reversal of narrative
The main purpose of this article is to present the international legal proceedings initiated by South Africa not as a criticism of Israel’s conduct of war, but as the „A South African propaganda campaign in support of Hamas” Please present it.
-
A Deconstruction of „Urgency”: The key argument of the hasbara here is based on technical and procedural details. Given that South Africa requested an extension for the submission of pleadings due to the complexity of the case, the article draws a political conclusion: the case is „falling apart,” and the earlier invocation of humanitarian urgency was merely a pretext.
-
Confusion regarding the competent authorities: The article mentions the International Court of Justice (ICJ—disputes between states) and the International Criminal Court (ICC—individual responsibility) in a single sentence. Although the two institutions are entirely distinct, the inclusion of the sentence attributed to the ICC’s chief prosecutor (or taken out of context) serves the purpose of portraying the Hague-based institutional system as uniformly exonerating Israel and the charges as baseless.
2. Rhetorical Arsenal: The „Blood Libel” and Historical Trauma (Pathos)
The text does not merely employ legal arguments; it also evokes deeply ingrained cultural and historical tropes in the reader:
-
The phrase „absurd blood libel”: The use of the term „blood libel” in pro-Israel discourse is a deliberate rhetorical device. It links the anti-Semitic ritual accusations leveled against Jews since the Middle Ages with modern, state-level human rights criticisms. In doing so, it removes the legal proceedings from rational legal discourse from the outset and classifies them as systemic anti-Semitism.
-
The political application of the legal principle of intent (mens rea): The most difficult element of the legal definition of genocide to prove is the intentionality (the aim is to destroy a group, either in whole or in part). The article builds on this new development: since the intent „has not been proven to this day,” it dismisses the accusation itself as a lie and propaganda.
3. The „Human Shield” and Shifting Blame
The high number of civilian casualties is Israel’s weakest point on the international stage. Hasbara addresses this moral dilemma by shifting all responsibility onto others:
-
Hamas as the perpetrator: According to this narrative, it is not Israeli airstrikes but Hamas that is responsible for the deaths of Gaza’s civilians, as Hamas „uses the civilian population as human shields.”.
-
The charge of actual genocide: The article makes a classic counter-argument: „It is Hamas that is guilty of genocide”. Through its detailed, graphic depiction of the horrors of October 7 (torture, rape, the massacre of civilians), the text restores the moral balance: Israel is the defending party, while the aggressor is a genocidal entity, so Israel’s actions automatically fall into the category of self-defense.
4. „Related Articles” and Contextual Reinforcement
As with the previous article on Debra Messing, the editorial team reinforces the main argument here with internal links and subheadings:
-
„A slap in the face for the anti-Zionists: Hamas itself has debunked the ’genocide’ lie”
-
„Israel’s ’genocide’: It was never about the facts”
This technique is known as echo chamber effect use. To the reader, the headlines suggest that the matter has been definitively settled, that the facts vindicate Israel, and that any contrary action under international law is merely political theater or malicious disinformation.
Summary
The article represents that branch of hasbara that defies international legal pressure. Instead of debating the material reality of the humanitarian situation in Gaza, the extent of the destruction, or the statistics on civilian casualties, he shifts the discourse to the length of procedural deadlines, the crimes of Hamas, and the political motivations of the South African government. In doing so, he effectively neutralizes the weight of the „genocide” accusation in the eyes of the target audience.
